In promulgating the case for Assange, Haigh is acting as an apologist for the anti-US left. But who cares what he thinks?

Well done, On Line Opinion for holding to a broadsheet position, one gets so sick of the line run on these issues by the Age, SMH and OZ and other AIJAC mouthpieces.
Thanks Bruce, for a succinct summary and one can only despise Michael Fullilove (a local Daniel Pipes?) for his contemptible effort.
Disclosures, Michael?

Half-baked is right. Fullilove also peddled this same pompous twaddle in an article in the Drum December 16 titled "Wikileaks: fruit of an unhealthy tree."

In which he made the astonishing comment that the cables tell us nothing new.

It remains a source of great mystery to me as to how anyone can know this, given we've had only a fraction of what's coming.

Certainly I have been interested in and informed by some of what we've had so far.

Fullilove is arrogant - he doesn't get the fundamental point of Wikileaks - that it does indeed reduce the knowledge gap between governments and people. A gap that has grown far too wide.

If I wanted to be really spiteful I could suggest that people like Fullilove prefer it that way - after all, he knows everything that's going to be in the cables - but he doesn't think the rest of us need to.

But I don't want to be really spiteful. Just a little bit.

If it's a matter of "the truth verses the American government" - then that doesn't say much for the American Government.
It seems that high-profile critics of Wikileaks and Assange are in one way or another attempting to protect U.S. hegemony. After all, when secrecy and collusion are part of normal operating procedure, exposure could spoil the party.
Fullilove was merely doing his part by adding another sandbag to shore up the base of the prevailing state of affairs.

The mongrel was dealing in stolen goods.

579,

We are indebted to you for another scintillating commentary on the morality at play in the Wikileaks saga. (I take it you're not referring to Fullilove)
You're obviously in favour of all news outlets being prosecuted for - as you call it - "dealing in stolen goods".
There is no law against facilitating the exposure of leaked material. It has been suggested that in lieu of such a law, the Americans are looking instead at trying to pin collusion on Assange regarding Bradley Manning's contribution to Wikileaks